Live data from Hacker News

Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

niemanlab.org

791–800 of 835 posts

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#791
post #788

Earlier quoted context omitted.

jascii says> "The way you are firing yourself up to commit homicide over a hypothetical situation..." He's isn't "firing [himself] up.." as you say, he's thinking out what could possibly happen and considering what his options are. If you wait until you're in such a situation (people are breaking into your car and threatening to harm the occupants) you simply don't have sufficient time to think out those options - yo…

I am well aware of the benefits of visualisation which is why this is so disturbing. Driving a car into a crowd is not self-defense, it is mass homicide and mentally training yourself to make that a "valid option" can be extremely dangerous.

You're glossing over the details of my post for the benefit of your position.

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#792
post #728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So they didn't try, they succeeded.

Kerlikowske stood them down and it was controversial.

Ah, it wasn't clear from the phrasing. I thought he got promoted for being "tough on crime".

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#793

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said "stupid and abusive". Not the sort of terminology usually used for "property damage". And yeah, I read (and just reread) your next sentence, and it still reads as a "shit happens" attitude to me. As I read it, you're saying there's nothing we can possibly do to ensure that rate of "stupid and abusive" cops is any lower than the rate of "stupid and rioting" civilians. (Or the most optimistic reading of it I c…

You completely missed the point then and are absolutely wrong about what I said. Have a nice day.

Do you mind please responding to my most recent questions for you?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23398553

Thank you either way.

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#794

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of a foundation I can donate to that will explicitly use the money in these types of lawsuits against the government?

ACLU?

The ACLU has too many objectives, so I don't think defending journalism is their primary goal. This fund is probably better, dollar for dollar: https://www.spj.org/ldf.asp

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#795

When "Freedom of the Press" is under attack, newspapers/press/media have had their legal counsel file lawsuits against the government. But with the demise of revenue for many newspapers (and many going out of business), I wonder if they will take those expensive steps.

Are you aware of a foundation I can donate to that will explicitly use the money in these types of lawsuits against the government?

https://www.spj.org/ldf.asp

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#796

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but then why have the police at all?

You say that now, but when the school shooter is at your kids school, suddenly you’ll think that a police force is a good idea. We can’t not have police, don’t be ridiculous.

Please don't descend into strawman arguments and false dilemmas.

It is not a binary choice between the militaristic, public-hostile police we have now, and no police at all.

As it is, the police in schools frequently do inappropriate things, such as bodyslamming 40kg girls or putting children in handcuffs for acting up in class. A school security guard, charged with protecting the students and staff, with no authority to arrest or punish anyone, would do fine.

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#797
post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>>>>>>>>> "looting is an action and not a quality." - no, it's absolutely a crime, and a 'quality' of an individual to the extent that we definitely consider it very immoral, and we have laws against it. It's not 'protesting' in any sense of the term. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Branding someone a rioter empowers the utterer and subjugates the one deemed rioting in your framing" - a 'riot' is not a 'framing' - it's for the mos…

By defenders, I mean those not associated with law enforcement, who defended people or property from harm or damage during protests. You seem to really believe in capital T truth as something that can be known by you and by others including police in a large protest, or riot, or looting, or all of the above. I don’t share this belief in Truth being knowable in the field. That’s why police don’t have unlimited latitud…

I understand the truth can't always be known in a situation - and I fully agree given ambiguity, he police don't have the right to use inappropriate force - however 'looters are looters' - there's no question about the illegality and inappropriateness of that, and we do know that looting is happening.

This looting causes a lot of personal damage, people are losing their life savings and livelihoods, and nobody seems to care.

I see a lot of rhetoric and populism trying to side-step the issue and it really needs to be clear - there's a very wide gap between 'protesting' and 'looting' and they are not 'shades of the same thing'.

Also, I'm not sure if it's legal or appropriate to even 'protest' out in the open, on highways or streets - I think these things need to move to controlled ares, like in front of city hall or in parks, but that's a slightly different matter.

I'm also not entirely condemning people 'caught up in a riot' as I understand these things happen in social waves, and people would be doing things they might not otherwise. It's not a big moral condemnation, it's an articulation of reality.

I'm actually sympathetic to the protesters overall, but I lose sympathy quickly when I see it out of hand. I also think we need to be sympathetic to the police, and accept that we, as citizens are giving them a nary impossible task - which is to use force to move people out of an area, and then somehow remain within perfect contraints at all times. Some of the police actions are beyond unreasonable and they should go to jail, but I'm not even sure that it's systematic. What can we expect by sending 5000 officers in to physically move aggressive, often violent people out of the way. Punches will fly in some cases. Batons, purposeful harm with weapons, irresponsible use of fire arms - this is too much obviously and has to be punished.

I'm really happy to show support for reforming police actions, but I'm not going to take sides in a 'civic street war'.

What's happening now is just shameful for almost every party.

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#798

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but then why have the police at all?

You say that now, but when the school shooter is at your kids school, suddenly you’ll think that a police force is a good idea. We can’t not have police, don’t be ridiculous.

I think if you throw away the existing system, you can still call what we replace it with "police" but it would be unrecognizable.

We need something closer to social service workers, the vast majority of which do not require arms.

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#799
post #627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My reference was to people casually tossing around the word for "people on the right they dislike", when it wasn't really warranted. I'm not good at predicting much of anything, but best guess is that the model is something more like Venezuela/Hungary/Turkey/Russia rather than the variety from the 1930ies.

> My reference was to people casually tossing around the word for "people on the right they dislike", when it wasn't really warranted. I'm trying to understand why you think it wasn't really warranted. Perhaps it really isn't warranted. But I also think it's possible you are, like you said below, not seeing a bigger picture. I'll take your next sentence in reverse though. > the model is something more like Venezuela/…

I kind of feel like people here are not reading what I'm actually writing.

I think 45 and company are fascists, or fascist-curious or adjacent or something like that.

In the past. Say, GHWB, people would call him a fascist because they didn't like some bit of policy. I didn't care for his policies by and large, but I also do not think he was a fascist.

Is that clearer?

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#800
post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you living under a rock? Reddit has a compilation thread of dozens of examples of police escalating situations, attacking press, pushing old men with canes to the ground, shooting residents ON THEIR doorstep, randomly grabbing civilians and assaulting them. The list doesn't seem to stop. Since 2001, police have taken more American lives than all other terrorist activities combined.

Dude, you've justified torching a residential building in another thread. I think you should sit this one out, for your own good.

Oh please, nice try. You'd have to be desperate to make that assumption, just like the previous person that tried to pull that.

Supporting protestors and civil unrest doesn't mean you support violence, but I'm not a naive child that thinks great change happens without bad things accompanying it.

Post reply on HN